Unit 2 Module 5 (review!!) Flashcards
In which version of IDEA was Assistive technology first introduced?
A. 1975 Version
B. 1990 Version
C. 1997 Version
D. 2004 Version
B. 1990 Version
Which version of IDEA first mandated that the assistive technology be provided at no cost to the student?
A. 1975 Version
B. 1990 Version
C. 1997 Version
D. 2004 Version
D. 2004 Version
What version of IDEA first mandated that IEP teams consider assistive technology for all students with disabilities?
A. 1975 Version
B. 1990 Version
C. 1997 Version
D. 2004 Version
C. 1997 Version
PL 45–186 authorized funding for the production of Braille materials by the American Printing House for the Blind. Louis Braille published the Braille code (Blackhurst, 2005a).
A. 1900
B. 1958
C. 1953
D. 1832
D. 1832
Electric amplifying devices for individuals with hearing impairments were introduced.
A. 1900
B. 1958
C. 1953
D. 1832
A. 1900
PL 85–905 provided funding to purchase and distribute closed-captioned films to state schools for the deaf. invention of devices to magnify printed material.
A. 1900
B. 1958
C. 1953
D. 1832
C. 1953
PL 90–247, Elementary and Secondary Education Amendments of 1968, legislated the provision of educational technology for students with disabilities.
A. 1973
B. 1968
C. 1975
D. 1988
B. 1968
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act was passed. It was the first federal civil rights protection for people with disabilities in the United States.
A. 1973
B. 1968
C. 1975
D. 1988
A. 1973
PL 94–142, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) passed, ensuring services to children with disabilities throughout the United States.
A. 1973
B. 1968
C. 1975
D. 1988
C. 1975
PL 100–407, Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act, also known as the “Tech Act,” passed.
A. 1973
B. 1968
C. 1975
D. 1988
D. 1988
PL 101–476, reauthorization of IDEA, passed. It included the Tech Act’s definition of assistive technology as well as provided for assistive technology if the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team determined it was needed.
A. 1998
B. 1997
C. 2004
D. 1990
D. 1990
IDEA was reauthorized again and mandated that IEP teams consider assistive technology for all students with disabilities, shifting the focus of assistive technology as primarily for students with more severe or low-incidence disabilities (for example, students with visual impairments or students with severe intellectual disability) to also include students with high-incidence disabilities, such as individuals with learning disabilities.
A. 1998
B. 1997
C. 2004
D. 1990
B. 1997
The Tech Act was reauthorized.
A. 1998
B. 1997
C. 2004
D. 1990
A. 1998
The Tech Act was reauthorized again as the Assistive Technology Act, and IDEA was reauthorized as The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act.
A. 1998
B. 1997
C. 2004
D. 1990
C. 2004
SETT involves the identification and consideration of the student (for example, strengths, needs, preferences); the environments in which the student functions; and the tasks the student is expected to perform.
A. Matching Person and Technology (MPT)
B. Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (WATI)
C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
The MPT framework also suggests that assistive technology devices or tools should match with the student (strengths, challenges, attitudes, and interests); work within the student’s contexts; and fit the student’s tasks (Bryant & Bryant, 2003; Raskind & Bryant, 2002; Scherer & Craddock, 2002).
A. Matching Person and Technology (MPT)
B. Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (WATI)
C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
A. Matching Person and Technology (MPT)
The WATI team developed an assessment system to help identify the types of technology that may benefit students with various disabilities, based on each student’s individual abilities and challenges, environments, and tasks (Gierach, 2009).
A. Matching Person and Technology (MPT)
B. Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (WATI)
C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
B. Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (WATI)
The UKAT Toolkit provides resources in the form of worksheet-like pages for an IEP team to complete in order to guide the team through assistive technology decision making. (Lahm et al. (2002)
A. University of Kentucky Assistive Technology (UKAT) Toolkit
B. C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
C. National Assistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI) Assistive Technology Planner
A. University of Kentucky Assistive Technology (UKAT) Toolkit
The NATRI Assistive Technology Planner can be used by teachers, parents, and students to actively participate in assistive technology planning and decision making on an IEP team (Bausch & Ault, 2008; Bausch, Ault, & Hasselbring, 2006).
A. University of Kentucky Assistive Technology (UKAT) Toolkit
B. C. Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
C. National Assistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI) Assistive Technology Planner
C. National Assistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI) Assistive Technology Planner
Student, Environments, Tasks, and Tools (SETT)
A. Usually examines the type of technologies available for students and access to available funding
B. Requires that IEP team members explore the environment in which a student is educated to determine the appropriateness of the technology
C. Includes the identification and consideration of the student, the environments in which the student functions, and the tasks the student is expected to perform
C. Includes the identification and consideration of the student, the environments in which the student functions, and the tasks the student is expected to perform
Wisconsin Assistive Technology Initiative (WATI)
A. Mainly used to assess students’ use of AT and the efficacy with which such technologies are used
B. Typically used to assess the type of technologies available for students and assess the funding available
C. Used to identify the types of technology that may benefit students with various disabilities, based on students’ abilities and challenges, environments, and tasks for IEP consideration
C. Used to identify the types of technology that may benefit students with various disabilities, based on students’ abilities and challenges, environments, and tasks for IEP consideration
University of Kentucky Assistive Technology (UKAT) Toolkit
A. Recommends that IEP team members consider at least two different types of AT devices for students with disabilities
B. Requires that IEP team members complete worksheet-like pages in order to guide the AT decision process
C. Mainly used to assess students’ use of AT and the efficacy with which such technologies are used
B. Requires that IEP team members complete worksheet-like pages in order to guide the AT decision process
National Assistive Technology Research Institute (NATRI)
A. Provides IEP team members with an AT planner to promote participation by all members
B. Promotes research as the means through which IEP team members should assess AT and participate in the AT decision-making process
C. Requires that IEP team members complete worksheet-like pages in order to guide the AT decision process
A. Provides IEP team members with an AT planner to promote participation by all members
Matching Person and Technology (MPT)
A. Requires that IEP team members explore the environment in which a student is educated to determine the appropriateness of the technology
C. Usually examines the type of technologies available for students and assesses the funding available
C. Includes the identification and consideration of the student, the environments in which the student functions, and the tasks the student is expected to perform
C. Includes the identification and consideration of the student, the environments in which the student functions, and the tasks the student is expected to perform